United States Government Accountability Office

GAO Testimony Before the Committee on 

Veterans’ Affairs, House of 

Representatives

VETERANS’ DISABILITY 

BENEFITS 

Claims Processing 

Challenges and 

Opportunities for 

Improvements 

Statement for the Record by Cynthia A. Bascetta, Director, 

Education, Workforce, and Income Security Issues 

Not to Be Released 

Before 10:30 a.m. EST 

Wednesday, December 7, 2005

 

GAO-06-283T 
What GAO Found

United States Government Accountability Office

Why GAO Did This Study

Highlights

Accountability Integrity Reliability

December 7, 2005

VETERANS’ DISABILITY BENEFITS

Claims Processing Challenges and 

Highlights of GAO-06-283T, a statement Opportunities for Improvements 

for the record to the Committee on

Veterans’ Affairs, U.S. House of 

Representatives 

The Chairman, Committee on 

Veterans’ Affairs, U.S. House of

Representatives, asked GAO to 

report on the claims processing 

challenges and opportunities facing

the Department of Veterans Affairs 

(VA) disability compensation and 

pension program. For years, the 

claims process has been the 

subject of concern and attention 

within VA and by the Congress and 

veterans service organizations. 

Their concerns include long waits 

for decisions, large claims 

backlogs, and inaccurate decisions. 

Our work and media reports of 

significant discrepancies in average 

disability payments from state to 

state have also highlighted 

concerns over the consistency of

decision making within VA. In

January 2003, we designated

federal disability programs,

including VA’s compensation and

pension programs, as a high-risk 

area because of continuing

challenges to improving the

timeliness and consistency of its 

disability decisions and the need to 

modernize programs. VA’s outdated 

disability determination process 

does not reflect a current view of 

the relationship between 

impairments and work capacity. 

Advances in medicine and 

technology have allowed some

individuals with disabilities to live

more independently and work

more effectively. 

The Department of Veterans Affairs continues to experience challenges

processing veterans’ disability compensation and pension claims including 

large numbers of pending claims and lengthy processing times. While VA

made progress in fiscal years 2002 and 2003 reducing the size and age of its 

inventory of pending claims, it has lost ground since the end of fiscal year 

2003. For example, pending claims increased by over one-third from the end 

of fiscal year 2003 to the end of fiscal year 2005. Meanwhile, VA faces 

continuing questions about its ability to ensure that veterans get consistent 

decisions across its 57 regional offices. GAO recommended in August 2002 

that VA study the consistency of decisions made by different regional 

offices, identify acceptable levels of decision-making variation, and reduce 

variations found to be unacceptable. Several factors may impede VA’s 

ability to significantly improve its claims processing performance. These 

include the potential impacts of laws, court decisions, and increases in the 

number and complexity of claims received. 

Rating-Related Claims Pending at End of Period, Fiscal Years 2000-2005 

Opportunities for improvement may lie in more fundamental reform in the 

design and operation of disability compensation and pension claims 

programs. This would include reexamining program design and the context 

in which decisions are made as well as the structure and division of labor 

among field offices. For example, in recent years, GAO has found that VA 

and other federal disability programs have not been updated to reflect the 

current state of science, medicine, technology, and labor market conditions. 

The schedule on which disability decisions are made within VA, for example, 

is based primarily on estimates made in 1945 about the effect serviceconnected impairments have on the average individual's ability to perform 

jobs requiring manual or physical labor. In addition, our work has shown 

that about one-third of newly compensated veterans could be interested in 

receiving a lump sum payment, potentially saving VA time and money 

associated with reopening cases over time. In addition, VA and other 

organizations have identified potential changes to field operations that could 

enhance productivity and accuracy in processing disability claims. While 

reexamining claims processing challenges in a larger context may be 

daunting, there are mechanisms for undertaking such an effort, including the 

congressionally chartered commission currently studying veterans’ disability

benefits.

www.gao.gov/cgi-bin/getrpt?GAO-06-283T.

To view the full product, including the scope 

and methodology, click on the link above. 

For more information, contact Cynthia A. 

Bascetta at (202) 512-7215 or 

bascettac@gao.gov. 
Mr. Chairman and Members of the Committee: 

I am pleased to have the opportunity to comment on the claims processing 

challenges and opportunities facing the Department of Veterans Affairs’ 

(VA) disability compensation and pension programs. Through these 

programs, VA provided almost $30 billion in cash disability benefits to 

more than 3.4 million veterans and their survivors in fiscal year 2004. For 

years, the claims process has been the subject of concern and attention 

within VA and by the Congress and veterans service organizations. Many 

of their concerns have focused on long waits for decisions, large claims 

backlogs, and inaccurate decisions. Our work and media reports of 

significant discrepancies in average disability payments from state to state 

have also highlighted concerns about the consistency of decision making 

within VA. In January 2003, we designated modernizing VA and other 

federal disability programs as a high-risk area, because our work over the 

past decade found that these programs are based on concepts from the 

past and continue to experience management problems. VA’s disability 

programs have not been updated to reflect the current state of science,

medicine, technology, and labor market conditions. In addition, VA still 

experiences lengthy processing times and lacks a clear understanding of 

the extent of possible decision inconsistencies. 

You asked us to discuss the challenges and opportunities VA faces in 

processing disability compensation and pension claims. My statement 

draws on numerous GAO reports and testimonies on VA’s compensation 

and pension claims processing operations. (See Related GAO Products.) 

To update our work, we reviewed recent claims processing performance 

data and VA’s fiscal year 2005 Performance and Accountability Report, but 

did not perform independent verification of VA’s data. We conducted our 

work in November 2005 in accordance with generally accepted 

government auditing standards. 

In summary, VA continues to face challenges processing disability claims. 

For example, as of the end of fiscal year 2005, rating-related claims1

 were 

pending an average of 120 days, 9 days more than at the end of fiscal year 

 1

Rating-related claims are primarily original claims for disability compensation and pension 

benefits, and reopened claims. For example, veterans may file reopened claims if they 

believe their service-connected conditions have worsened. 

Page 1 GAO-06-283T 
2003, and far from VA’s strategic goal of 78 days.2

 During the same period, 

the rating-related inventory grew by about 92,000 claims to a total of about

346,000 claims. While VA has improved the accuracy of its rating-related 

compensation decisions to 84 percent in fiscal year 2005—close to its goal 

of 88 percent in fiscal year 2005, it has 3 years to reach its strategic goal of

98 percent. Further, we have identified concerns about the consistency of 

decisions across VA’s regional offices. VA has begun studying one 

indicator of inconsistency, the wide variations in average payments per 

veteran from state to state, in response to adverse media coverage. While 

VA is making efforts to address these problems, several factors may 

impede VA’s ability to make and sustain significant improvements in its 

claims processing performance. These include the potential impacts of 

laws, court decisions, and continued increases in the number and 

complexity of claims being filed. 

Opportunities for improvement may lie in more fundamental reform of 

VA’s disability compensation programs. This would include reexamining 

program design and the context in which decisions are made as well as the 

structure and division of labor among field offices. For example, in recent

years, GAO has found that VA and other federal disability programs have 

not been updated to reflect the current state of science, medicine, 

technology, and labor market conditions. The schedule on which disability 

decisions are made within VA, for example, is based primarily on 

estimates made in 1945 about the effect service-connected impairments 

have on the average individual’s ability to perform jobs requiring manual 

or physical labor. In addition, our work has shown that about one-third of 

newly compensated veterans could be interested in receiving a lump sum 

payment, which could potentially save VA time and money associated with 

reopening cases over time and could be beneficial to veterans. In addition, 

VA and other organizations have identified potential changes to field 

operations that could enhance productivity and accuracy in processing 

disability claims. While reexamining claims processing challenges in a 

larger context may be daunting, there are mechanisms for undertaking 

such an effort, including the congressionally chartered commission 

currently studying veterans’ disability benefits. 

 2

In its fiscal year 2005 Annual Performance and Accountability Report, VA reports a

separate strategic goal of 78 percent for rating-related compensation claims and 65 percent

for rating-related pension claims. 

Page 2 GAO-06-283T 
VA’s disability compensation program pays monthly benefits to veterans 

with service-connected disabilities (injuries or diseases incurred or 

aggravated while on active military duty) according to the severity of the 

disability. Also, VA pays dependency and indemnity compensation to some 

deceased veterans’ spouses, children, and parents and to survivors of 

service members who died on active duty. The pension program pays 

monthly benefits based on financial need to wartime veterans who have 

low income, served in a period of war, and are permanently and totally 

disabled for reasons not service-connected (or are aged 65 or older). VA 

also pays pensions to surviving spouses and unmarried children of 

deceased wartime veterans. 

Background 

When a veteran submits a claim to any of VA’s 57 regional offices, a 

veterans service representative (VSR) is responsible for obtaining the 

relevant evidence to evaluate the claim. Such evidence includes veterans’

military service records, medical examinations, and treatment records 

from VA medical facilities and private medical service providers. Once a 

claim is developed (i.e., has all the necessary evidence), a rating VSR, also

called a rating specialist, evaluates the claim and determines whether the 

claimant is eligible for benefits. If the veteran is eligible for disability 

compensation, the rating specialist assigns a percentage rating based on 

degree of disability. Veterans with multiple service-connected disabilities 

receive a single composite rating. For veterans claiming pension eligibility, 

the regional office determines if the veteran served in a period of war, is 

permanently and totally disabled for reasons not service-connected (or is 

aged 65 or older), and meets the income thresholds for eligibility. A 

veteran who disagrees with the regional office’s decision for either 

program can appeal sequentially to VA’s Board of Veterans’ Appeals 

(BVA), the U.S. Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims, and the U.S. Court 

of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. 

In January 2003, we designated modernizing VA’s disability programs, 

along with other federal disability programs, as high-risk. We did so, in 

part, because VA had long-standing problems with lengthy claims 

processing times and lacked a clear understanding of the extent of 

possible decision inconsistencies. Moreover, VA’s disability programs have 

not been updated to reflect the current state of science, medicine, 

technology, and labor market conditions. 

In November 2003, the Congress established the Veterans’ Disability 

Benefits Commission to study the appropriateness of VA disability 

benefits, including disability criteria and benefit levels. The commission 

held its first public hearing in May 2005. 

Page 3 GAO-06-283T 
VA Continues to Face 

Significant Challenges 

in Processing 

Disability 

Compensation Claims 

VA continues to experience challenges processing veterans’ disability 

compensation and pension claims. These include large numbers of 

pending claims and lengthy processing times. While VA made progress in 

fiscal years 2002 and 2003 in reducing the size and age of its inventory of 

pending claims, it has lost ground since the end of fiscal year 2003. As 

shown in figure 1, pending claims increased by over one-third from the end 

of fiscal year 2003 to the end of fiscal year 2005, from about 254,000 to 

about 346,000. During the same period, claims pending over 6 months 

increased by about 54 percent, from about 47,000 to about 72,000. 

Figure1: Rating-Related Claims Pending at End of Period, Fiscal Years 2000-2005 

Similarly, as shown in figure 2, VA reduced the average age of its pending

claims from 182 days at the end of fiscal year 2001 to 111 days at the end 

of fiscal year 2003. Since then, however, average days pending have

increased to 120 days at the end of fiscal year 2005. This is also far from 

VA’s strategic goal of an average of 78 days pending by the end of fiscal 

year 2008. Meanwhile, the time required to resolve appeals remains too 

long. While the average time to resolve an appeal dropped from 731 days 

in fiscal year 2002 to 622 days in fiscal year 2005, VA was still far from its 

fiscal year 2005 goal of 500 days. 

Page 4 GAO-06-283T 
Figure 2: Average Days Pending for VA Compensation and Pension Rating-Related 

Claims, Fiscal Years 2000-2005 

In addition to problems with timeliness of decisions, VA acknowledges 

that the accuracy of regional office decisions needs further improvement. 

VA reports that it has improved the accuracy of decisions on rating related

compensation claims from 80 percent in fiscal year 2002 to 84 percent in 

fiscal year 2005, close to its 2005 goal of 88 percent.3

VA also faces continuing questions about its ability to ensure that veterans 

receive consistent decisions—that is, comparable decisions on benefit 

entitlement and rating percentage regardless of the regional offices 

making the decisions. The issue of decision-making consistency across VA 

is not new. In May 2000 testimony4

 before the House Subcommittee on 

Oversight and Investigations, Committee on Veterans’ Affairs, we 

underscored the conclusion made by the National Academy of Public 

 3

We are currently reviewing the reliability of VA’s claims processing accuracy data. 

4

GAO, Veterans Benefits Administration: Problems and Challenges Facing Disability

Claims Processing, GAO/T-HEHS/AIMD-00-146 (Washington, D.C.: May 18, 2000). 

Page 5 GAO-06-283T 
Administration in 19975

 that VA needed to study the consistency of 

decisions made by different regional offices, identify the degree of 

subjectivity expected for various medical issues, and then set consistency

standards for those issues. In August 2002, we drew attention to the fact

that there are wide disparities in state-to-state average compensation 

payments per disabled veteran. We noted that such variation raises the 

question of whether similarly situated veterans who submit claims to 

different regional offices for similar conditions receive reasonably 

consistent decisions.6

 We concluded that VA needed to systematically

assess decision-making consistency to provide a foundation for identifying 

acceptable levels of variation and to reduce variations found to be 

unacceptable. Again, in November 2004, we highlighted the need for VA to

develop plans for studying consistency issues.7

 VA concurred in principle 

with our findings and recommendation in the August 2002 report, agreed 

that consistency is an important goal, and acknowledged that it has work 

to do to achieve it. However, VA was silent on how it would evaluate and 

measure consistency. Subsequently, VA concurred with our 

recommendation in the November 2004 report that it conduct systematic 

reviews for possible decision inconsistencies. 

In December 2004, the media drew attention to the wide variations in the 

average disability compensation payment per veteran in the 50 states and 

published VA’s own data showing that the average payments varied from a 

low of $6,710 in Ohio to a high of $10,851 in New Mexico. Reacting to 

these media reports, in December 2004, the Secretary of Veterans Affairs 

instructed the agency’s Inspector General to determine why average 

payments per veteran vary widely from state to state.8

 The Inspector 

General found that compensation payments are affected by many factors 

and that some disabilities are inherently more susceptible to variations in 

rating determinations. The Inspector General made eight 

recommendations to improve the consistency of rating decisions, 

 5

National Academy of Public Administration, Management of Compensation and Pension 

Benefits Claim Processes for Veterans (Washington, D.C.: August 1997). 

6

GAO, Veterans’ Benefits: Quality Assurance for Disability Claims and Appeals 

Processing Can Be Further Improved, GAO-02-806 (Washington, D.C.: Aug. 16, 2002). 

7

GAO, Veterans Benefits: VA Needs Plan for Assessing Consistency of Decisions, 

GAO-05-99 (Washington, D.C.: Nov. 19, 2004).

8

Department of Veterans Affairs Office of Inspector General, Review of State Variances in

VA Disability Compensation Payments, Report No. 05-00765-137 (Washington, D.C.: May 

19, 2005). 

Page 6 GAO-06-283T 
including recommending that VBA conduct a study of the major influences 

on compensation payments and use the results to detect, correct, and

prevent unacceptable payment patterns. Also, VA’s Veterans Benefits 

Administration began a study in March 2005 of three disabilities believed

to have potential for inconsistency: hearing loss, post-traumatic stress 

disorder, and knee conditions. VA assigned 10 subject matter experts to 

review 1,750 regional office decisions. After completing its analysis of 

study data, VA planned to develop a schedule for future studies of specific 

ratable conditions and recommend a schedule for periodic follow-up 

studies of previously studied conditions. 

Recent history has shown that VA’s claims processing workload and 

performance are being affected by several factors, including the impacts of 

laws and court decisions and the filing behavior of veterans. For example, 

court decisions in 1999 and 2003 related to VA’s duty to assist veterans in

developing their benefit claims, as well as legislation in response to those 

decisions, significantly affected VA’s ability to produce rating-related 

decisions. VA attributes some of the worsening of inventory level and 

pending timeliness since the end of fiscal year 2003 to a September 2003 

court decision that required over 62,000 claims to be deferred, many for 

90 days or longer. Also, VA notes that legislation and VA regulations have 

expanded benefit entitlement and as a result added to the volume of 

claims. For example, presumptions of service-connected disabilities have 

been created in recent years for many Vietnam veterans and former 

Prisoners of War. Also, VA expects additional claims receipts based on the

enactment of legislation allowing certain military retirees to receive both 

military retirement pay and VA disability compensation. 

In addition, VA continues to receive increasing numbers of rating-related 

claims, from about 586,000 in fiscal year 2000 to about 788,000 in fiscal 

year 2005. VA projects 3 percent increases in claims received in fiscal 

years 2005 and 2006. VA notes that claims received are increasing in part 

because older veterans are filing disability claims for the first time. One 

reason for this increase could be that older veterans have incentives to file

disability claims because obtaining a service-connected disability rating is 

a gateway to VA health care. According to VA, the complexity of claims is

also increasing because veterans are citing more disabilities in their claims

than in the past. Because each disability needs to be evaluated, these 

claims can take longer to complete. VA planned to develop baseline data

on average issues per claim by the end of calendar year 2005.

In November 2004, we reported that VA would have to rely on productivity

improvements to achieve its claims processing performance goals in the 

Page 7 GAO-06-283T 
face of increasing workloads and decreased staffing levels.9

 However, its 

fiscal year 2005 budget justification did not provide information on claims

processing productivity or how much VA expected to improve 

productivity. VA’s fiscal year 2006 budget justification provides 

information on actual and planned productivity, in terms of rating-related 

claims decided per direct full-time equivalent (FTE) employee, and 

identifies a number of initiatives that could improve claims processing 

performance. These initiatives include technology initiatives, such as 

Virtual VA, involving the creation of electronic claims folders; 

consolidation of the processing of Benefits Delivery at Discharge (BDD) 

claims at two regional offices; and collaboration with the Department of 

Defense (DOD) to improve VA’s ability to obtain evidence, such as 

evidence of in-service stressors for veterans claiming service-connected 

Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder. 

Despite these and other measures, we noted in May 2005 that it is still not 

clear whether VA will be able to achieve its planned improvements.10 In 

our May 2005 testimony we noted that VA’s fiscal year 2006 budget 

justification assumes that it will increase the number of rating-related 

claims completed per FTE from 94 in fiscal year 2004 to 109 in fiscal year 

2005 and 2006, a 16 percent increase. For fiscal year 2005, this level of 

desired productivity translates into VA completing almost 826,000 ratingrelated decisions. In actuality, VA completed about 763,000 decisions in 

fiscal year 2005. 

While VA is taking a number of actions to address its claims processing 

challenges, there are opportunities for more fundamental reform, that 

could dramatically improve decision making and processing. These 

include reexamining program design and the context in which decisions 

are made as well as the structure and division of labor among field offices.

For example, in designating federal disability programs as high risk in 

2003, GAO noted that VA’s and the Social Security Administration’s (SSA) 

disability programs have not been updated to reflect the current state of 

science, medicine, technology, and labor market conditions. In addition, 

Opportunities for 

Improvement May Lie 

in More Fundamental 

Reform 

 9

GAO, Veterans’ Benefits: More Transparency Needed to Improve Oversight of VBA’s 

Compensation and Pension Staffing Levels, GAO-05-47 (Washington, D.C.: Nov. 15, 2004).

10GAO, Veterans’ Disability Benefits: Claims Processing Problems Persist and Major

Performance Improvements May Be Difficult, GAO-05-749T (Washington, D.C.: May 26,

2005). 

Page 8 GAO-06-283T 
our work has shown that about one-third of newly compensated veterans 

could be interested in receiving a lump sum payment, potentially saving

VA time and money associated with reopening cases over time. Moreover,

VA and other organizations have identified potential changes to field 

operations that could enhance productivity and accuracy in processing 

disability claims. 

After more than a decade of research, GAO has determined that federal 

disability programs are in urgent need of attention and transformation and 

placed modernizing federal disability programs on its high-risk list in 

January 2003. Specifically, our research showed that the disability 

programs administered by VA and the Social Security Administration 

lagged behind the scientific advances and economic and social changes 

that have redefined the relationship between impairments and work. For 

example, advances in medicine and technology have reduced the severity 

of some medical conditions and have allowed individuals to live with 

greater independence and function in work settings. Moreover, the nature 

of work has changed in recent decades as the national economy has 

moved away from manufacturing-based jobs to service- and knowledgebased employment. Yet VA’s and SSA’s disability programs remain mired 

in concepts from the past—particularly the concept that impairment 

equates to an inability to work—and as such, we found that these 

programs are poorly positioned to provide meaningful and timely support 

for Americans with disabilities. 

In August 2002, we recommended that VA use its annual performance plan 

to delineate strategies for and progress in periodically updating labor 

market data used in its disability determination process. We also 

recommended that VA study and report to the Congress on the effects that 

a comprehensive consideration of medical treatment and assistive 

technologies would have on its disability programs’ eligibility criteria and 

benefits package. This study would include estimates of the effects on the 

size, cost, and management of VA’s disability programs and other relevant

VA programs and would identify any legislative actions needed to initiate 

and fund such changes.

Another area of program design that could be examined is the option of 

providing a lump sum payment in lieu of monthly disability compensation. 

In 1996, the Veterans’ Claims Adjudication Commission noted that most 

disability compensation claims are repeat claims—such as claims for 

Page 9 GAO-06-283T 
increased disability percentage—and most repeat claims were from 

veterans with less severe disabilities.11 According to VA, about 65 percent 

of veterans who began receiving disability compensation in fiscal year 

2003 had disabilities rated 30 percent or less. The commission questioned 

whether concentrating claims processing resources on these claims, rather 

than on claims by more severely disabled veterans, was consistent with 

program intent. The commission asked Congress to consider paying less 

severely disabled veterans compensation in a lump sum. According to the 

commission, the lump sum option could have a number of benefits for VA 

as well as veterans. Specifically, the lump sum option could reduce the 

number of claims submitted and allow VA to process claims more 

quickly—especially those of more seriously disabled veterans. Moreover, a 

lump sum option could be more useful to some veterans as they make the 

transition from military to civilian life. In December 2000, we reported that 

about one-third of newly compensated veterans could be interested in a 

lump sum option. 

In addition to program design changes, external studies of VA’s disability 

claims process have identified the regional office structure as

disadvantageous to efficient operation. Specifically, in its January 1999 

report, the Congressional Commission on Servicemembers and Veterans 

Transition Assistance found that some regional offices might be so small 

that their disproportionately large supervisory overhead unnecessarily 

consumes personnel resources.12 Similarly, in its 1997 report, the National 

Academy of Public Administration found that VA could close a large 

number of regional offices and achieve significant savings in 

administrative overhead costs. 

Apart from the issue of closing regional offices, the Congressional 

Commission on Servicemembers and Veterans Transition Assistance 

highlighted a need to consolidate disability claims processing into fewer 

locations. VA has consolidated its education assistance and housing loan 

guaranty programs into fewer than 10 locations, and the commission 

encouraged VA to take similar action in the disability programs. In 1995 VA

enumerated several potential benefits of such a consolidation. These 

included allowing VA to assign the most experienced and productive 

 11Veterans’ Claims Adjudication Commission, Report to Congress (Washington D.C.:

December 1996). 

12Report of the Congressional Commission on Servicemembers and Veterans Transition 

Assistance (Washington, D.C.: Jan. 14, 1999). 

Page 10 GAO-06-283T 
adjudication officers and directors to the consolidated offices; facilitating 

increased specialization and as-needed expert consultation in deciding 

complex cases; improving the completeness of claims development, the 

accuracy and consistency of rating decisions, and the clarity of decision 

explanations; improving overall adjudication quality by increasing the pool 

of experience and expertise in critical technical areas; and facilitating 

consistency in decision making through fewer consolidated claims 

processing centers. VA has already consolidated some of its pension 

workload (specifically, income and eligibility verifications) at three 

regional offices. Also, VA has consolidated at its Philadelphia regional 

office dependency and indemnity compensation claims by survivors of 

service members who died on active duty, including those who died during 

Operation Enduring Freedom and Operation Iraqi Freedom. 

VA is also is in the process of consolidating decision-making on Benefits 

Delivery at Discharge claims, which are generally original claims for 

disability compensation, at the Salt Lake City and Winston-Salem regional 

offices. VA established this program to expedite decisions on disability 

compensation claims from newly separated service members. A service 

member can file a BDD claim up to 180 days before separation; VA staff 

performs some development work on the claim before separation. VBA 

actually decides the claim after the service member is separated and the 

official discharge form (DD Form 214) is received. Under the

consolidation, regional offices and VBA’s 142 BDD sites will accept and 

develop claims, but will send the developed claims to Salt Lake City or 

Winston-Salem for decision. VBA expects this consolidation to help 

improve decision efficiency and consistency. Consolidation began in

December 2004 and is expected to be completed by March 2006. 

While reexamining claims processing challenges in a larger context may

be daunting, there are mechanisms for undertaking such an effort, 

including the congressionally chartered commission currently studying 

veterans’ disability benefits. In November 2003, the Congress established 

the Veterans’ Disability Benefits Commission to study the appropriateness 

of VA disability benefits, including disability criteria and benefit levels. 

The commission was to examine and provide recommendations on (1) the 

appropriateness of the benefits, (2) the appropriateness of the benefit 

amounts, and (3) the appropriate standard or standards for determining 

whether a disability or death of a veteran should be compensated. As of 

October 2005, the commission had established 31 potential research 

questions for study. Questions include how well do disability benefits meet 

the congressional intent of replacing average impairment in earnings 

capacity, should lump sum payments be made for certain disabilities or 

Page 11 GAO-06-283T 
level of severity of disability, and how does VA’s claims processing 

operation compare to other disability programs, including the location and 

number of processing centers. These issues and others have been raised 

by previous studies of VBA’s disability claims process. 

For further information, please contact Cynthia A. Bascetta at (202) 

512-7215. Also contributing to this statement were Cristina Chaplain, 

Irene Chu, and Martin Scire. 

Contact and 

Acknowledgments 

Page 12 GAO-06-283T 
Page 13 GAO-06-283T 

Related GAO Products 

Veterans’ Disability Benefits: Improved Transparency Needed to 

Facilitate Oversight of VBA’s Compensation and Pension Staffing 

Levels. GAO-06-225T. Washington, D.C.: November 3, 2005. 

VA Benefits: Other Programs May Provide Lessons for Improving 

Individual Unemployability Assessments. GAO-06-207T. Washington,

D.C.: October 27, 2005. 

Veterans’ Disability Benefits: Claims Processing Problems Persist and 

Major Performance Improvements May Be Difficult. GAO-05-749T. 

Washington, DC.: May 26, 2005. 

VA Disability Benefits: Board of Veterans’ Appeals Has Made

Improvements in Quality Assurance, but Challenges Remain for VA in 

Assuring Consistency. GAO-05-655T. Washington, D.C.: May 5, 2005. 

High-Risk Series: An Update. GAO-05-207. Washington, D.C.: January 

2005. 

Veterans Benefits: VA Needs Plan for Assessing Consistency of 

Decisions. GAO-05-99. Washington, D.C.: November 19, 2004. 

Veterans’ Benefits: More Transparency Needed to Improve Oversight of 

VBA’s Compensation and Pension Staffing Levels. GAO-05-47. 

Washington, D.C.: November 15, 2004. 

Veterans’ Benefits: Improvements Needed in the Reporting and Use of 

Data on the Accuracy of Disability Claims Decisions. GAO-03-1045. 

Washington, D.C.: September 30, 2003. 

Department of Veterans Affairs: Key Management Challenges in Health 

and Disability Programs. GAO-03-756T. Washington, D.C.: May 8, 2003.

Veterans Benefits Administration: Better Collection and Analysis of 

Attrition Data Needed to Enhance Workforce Planning. GAO-03-491. 

Washington, D.C.: April 28, 2003. 

Veterans’ Benefits: Claims Processing Timeliness Performance Measures 

Could Be Improved. GAO-03-282. Washington, D.C.: December 19, 2002. 

Veterans’ Benefits: Quality Assurance for Disability Claims and Appeals 

Processing Can Be Further Improved. GAO-02-806. Washington, D.C.: 

August 16, 2002. 
Veterans’ Benefits: VBA’s Efforts to Implement the Veterans Claims 

Assistance Act Need Further Monitoring. GAO-02-412. Washington, D.C.: 

July 1, 2002.

Veterans’ Benefits: Despite Recent Improvements, Meeting Claims 

Processing Goals Will Be Challenging. GAO-02-645T. Washington, D.C.: 

April 26, 2002. 

Veterans Benefits Administration: Problems and Challenges Facing 

Disability Claims Processing. GAO/T-HEHS/AIMD-00-146. Washington,

D.C.: May 18, 2000. 

Page 14 GAO-06-283T (130540) 
This is a work of the U.S. government and is not subject to copyright protection in the 

United States. It may be reproduced and distributed in its entirety without further 

permission from GAO. However, because this work may contain copyrighted images or 

other material, permission from the copyright holder may be necessary if you wish to 

reproduce this material separately. 
GAO’s Mission The Government Accountability Office, the audit, evaluation and 

investigative arm of Congress, exists to support Congress in meeting its 

constitutional responsibilities and to help improve the performance and 

accountability of the federal government for the American people. GAO 

examines the use of public funds; evaluates federal programs and policies; 

and provides analyses, recommendations, and other assistance to help

Congress make informed oversight, policy, and funding decisions. GAO’s 

commitment to good government is reflected in its core values of 

accountability, integrity, and reliability. 

The fastest and easiest way to obtain copies of GAO documents at no cost

is through GAO’s Web site (www.gao.gov). Each weekday, GAO posts 

newly released reports, testimony, and correspondence on its Web site. To

have GAO e-mail you a list of newly posted products every afternoon, go 

to www.gao.gov and select “Subscribe to Updates.” 

The first copy of each printed report is free. Additional copies are $2 each. 

A check or money order should be made out to the Superintendent of 

Documents. GAO also accepts VISA and Mastercard. Orders for 100 or 

more copies mailed to a single address are discounted 25 percent. Orders 

should be sent to: 

U.S. Government Accountability Office 

441 G Street NW, Room LM 

Washington, D.C. 20548 

To order by Phone: Voice: (202) 512-6000 

TDD: (202) 512-2537 

Fax: (202) 512-6061 

Contact: 

Web site: www.gao.gov/fraudnet/fraudnet.htm

E-mail: fraudnet@gao.gov

Automated answering system: (800) 424-5454 or (202) 512-7470 

Gloria Jarmon, Managing Director, JarmonG@gao.gov (202) 512-4400 

U.S. Government Accountability Office, 441 G Street NW, Room 7125 

Washington, D.C. 20548 

Paul Anderson, Managing Director, AndersonP1@gao.gov (202) 512-4800

U.S. Government Accountability Office, 441 G Street NW, Room 7149 

Washington, D.C. 20548 

Obtaining Copies of 

GAO Reports and 

Testimony

Order by Mail or Phone 

To Report Fraud,

Waste, and Abuse in 

Federal Programs 

Congressional 

Relations 

Public Affairs 

PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER